美国律师在数字取证和电子证据方面的经验启示

M. Losavio, D. Keeling, Adel Said Elmaghraby, George E. Higgins, J. Shutt
{"title":"美国律师在数字取证和电子证据方面的经验启示","authors":"M. Losavio, D. Keeling, Adel Said Elmaghraby, George E. Higgins, J. Shutt","doi":"10.1109/SADFE.2008.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The experiences of lawyers with electronic evidence and digital forensics are examined. The assessment indicates disparate experiences based on case type as to 1) the use of different types of electronic evidence, 2) disputes over that use and 3) utilization of digital forensics experts. Further study indicates use of electronic evidence continues to increase, from which we infer increased challenges to the reliability of digital forensic testimony.","PeriodicalId":391486,"journal":{"name":"2008 Third International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implications of Attorney Experiences with Digital Forensics and Electronic Evidence in the United States\",\"authors\":\"M. Losavio, D. Keeling, Adel Said Elmaghraby, George E. Higgins, J. Shutt\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/SADFE.2008.11\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The experiences of lawyers with electronic evidence and digital forensics are examined. The assessment indicates disparate experiences based on case type as to 1) the use of different types of electronic evidence, 2) disputes over that use and 3) utilization of digital forensics experts. Further study indicates use of electronic evidence continues to increase, from which we infer increased challenges to the reliability of digital forensic testimony.\",\"PeriodicalId\":391486,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2008 Third International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2008 Third International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/SADFE.2008.11\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2008 Third International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SADFE.2008.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

律师与电子证据和数字取证的经验进行了审查。该评估表明,基于案件类型的不同经验:1)使用不同类型的电子证据;2)使用争议;3)使用数字取证专家。进一步的研究表明,电子证据的使用继续增加,由此我们推断,对数字法医证词可靠性的挑战越来越大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Implications of Attorney Experiences with Digital Forensics and Electronic Evidence in the United States
The experiences of lawyers with electronic evidence and digital forensics are examined. The assessment indicates disparate experiences based on case type as to 1) the use of different types of electronic evidence, 2) disputes over that use and 3) utilization of digital forensics experts. Further study indicates use of electronic evidence continues to increase, from which we infer increased challenges to the reliability of digital forensic testimony.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信